TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 1302
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nst law and facts on record. 1.2 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in justifying the action of the assessing officer in which the assessing officer has disallowed the difference in the account of sundry creditor i.e. M/s ITC Ltd without appreciating the details as well as documentary evidence filed during the course of assessment proceeding. 1.3 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has failed to appreciate the fact that the sundry creditors as well as amount of purchase is supported with the documentary evidence and there is no single instances of bogus transaction as such amount of purchase shown in the books of account cannot be disallowed. 1.4 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has. a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....et of M/s Prabjyoti Marketing, it was noticed that the assessee had shown sundry creditor of Rs. 91,44,472/- in the name of M/s ITC Ltd. The AO issued notice u/s 143(6) to ITC Ltd. for confirmation of the account of the assessee in their books of a/c. ITC Ltd. confirmed a balance of Rs. 65,52,852/- as against the balance of Rs. 91,44,472/- in assessee's books of a/c. Thus, there was excess credit of Rs. 25,91,620/- in the books of assessee in the account of creditor M/s ITC Ltd. The assessee submitted following reconciliation of creditor's a/c as on 31-3-2007: Balance as per Prabjyoti Marketing Less: 9144472.40 1. Amount debited by ITC but not Credited by assessee. 2199867.00 2. Cheque issued but not presented by ITC ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contention of the assessee for the booking of the excess sundry credit in the name of M/s ITC Ltd. to the tune of Rs. 4,63,596/- is not tenable. As' stated above, the assessee could not further reconcile the account with ITC Limited as required vide this office letter dated 15.12.-2009 and also could not explain the difference with the help of the books of account. Therefore, the accounts submitted above are not reliable and not acceptable. Considering all the facts of the case, it is clear that the assessee has further inflated her: purchases to the extent of Rs. 3,91 ,753/- and reflected the corresponding amount as outstanding liability in the account of M/s. ITC Ltd. Thus, as the assessee has not been able to reconcile the further d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rounded off: Rs. 27,78,370/- 2.4. Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to page 25 of the paper book, wherein the notice u/s 142(1) is contained in which AO had required the assessee to explain the following difference on the basis of letter dated 1- 12-2009 received from M/s ITC Ltd.: 1. Amount debited by ITC not credited by you (details of bills not given) Rs. 21,99,667/- 2. Cheque issued by you but not presented by ITC (details of bills not given) Rs. 3,03,393/- 3. Difference in opening balance of both the Parties as on 1.4.2006 Rs. 1,24,282/- 4. Difference of last year - interest etc. Rs. 35,921/- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the same and, therefore, the said goods returnedhad been shown as stock in hand, lying with the ITC. In support of its contention, the assessee had submitted the stock statement. The assessee further pointed out that if the AO's contention was accepted then the gross profit would be 38.34%, as under: Particulars Amount Particulars Amount To opening stock 2215578 By sales 8893854 To purchases 12452905 By closing stock 6984359 Less: Excess purchases 2199867 10253038 To gross profit 15878213 15878213 3.2. Ld. counsel referred to pages 34 to 93 of the paper book wherein stock statement is contained and pointed out that in the aforementioned computation, the closing stock of Rs. 69,84,359/- includes the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....claim for Rs. 26,32,303/-, which the assessee continued to show in its stock register as a separate item, which is evident from page 93 of the PB. In order to examine the credibility of assessee's explanation, we have to consider the various aspects. The assessee, admittedly, was distributor of M/s ITC Ltd., and, therefore, had regular dealings with M/s ITC Ltd. Considering the nature of assessee's business, the explanation given by assessee cannot be faulted, because the greeting cards are always year specific and the old stock become obsolete and cannot be used. This practice, therefore, is commercially prevalent in this line of business. 5.2. Further, as regards the credit entries being not accounted for in assessee's books of account, ....